What do other people think about having a dedicated Modular Synth forum? I was looking for the right place to discuss hardware modulars (MOTM, Blacet, etc) and could only find the Modular Synthesis forum under the How To group.

I figure it would make sense for there to be a dedicated Modular Synthesizer forum under the Instruments and Equipment group. I'm looking for info on hardware, but maybe software modulars and Nord soft modulars would go well there, too.

I know there's a dedicated DIY forum, which is a great place to discuss DIY modular gear, but a forum for commercially made stuff, as well as possibly some DIY or modification stuff, might be in order. Maybe even some help for people making Paia or Blacet kits.

Does anybody have any input?

mosc wrote:

You are right, this modular synthesis topic is misplaced. We wanted this to be a very broad topic to include G2s and softsynths. You know, techniques that apply to modular synthesis, not equipment. It could include DIY - why not. The how to forum is not the right place. Maybe composition is a better place... I don't know... Maybe it would be good to open this up the the community for input. How about posting your comments on the "electro-music.com" forum so we can get more input?

--Howard

bigtex wrote:

Hey Mosc,

There doesn't seem to be a modular synth discussion forum. There's the modular synth how-to forum, but I thought maybe there should be one for modulars (that aren't the DIY variety) under the Instruments and Equipment header.

You see, way back we felt that a lot of modular synth issues would be better if handled in some kind of "all encompassing all things modular" forum. That said, there is a lot of very interesting general modular synth stuff hidden away inside the G2 forum.

The best place for a modular synth forum? Well, the only place that makes sense is "Instruments and Equipment" _________________A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

Perhaps "Other Synths" should have a slew of synth manufacturers under it. It might be nice to expand Alesis to have subforums for the Ion/Micron as well. I'll have plenty to discuss about my Micron as soon as it gets back fromt he shop

For example, there could be a Yamaha section, too. A genearal FM synthesis under that might be good. Even though there aren't many new FM synths made today, I still think FM is cool and worth discussing.

But.... maybe too many subforums is a bad thing. Perhaps too much division of information would make stuff harder to find and split up discussions...

I'm kind of a newbie around here, so take anything I say with a grain of salt.

The modular section is a compromise. It came from many people starting to ask general synthesis questions in the G2 section because the perception of some people was that that was the only section that was being read. In fact some G2 people thought it was the only section that existed at all!

I thought (and still think) that it's a great shame that there isn't more intergration between the G2 section and sections like the soundlab one or the MAX/MSP one. It's not like the techniques involved are drastically different.

Generally I think that in electronic music there is too much emphasis on speciffic implementations (most often even speciffic products) and not that much on the overall principles, aesthetic questions or playing techniques. I have therefor long advocated that the G2 section as well as the MAX (and so on) sections should be sub-sections of a larger "modular synthesis" one. In the main section the overall techniques could be discussed and ideas could be freely traded between users of various systems while system-speciffic matters could be placed in their respective sections.

I now think that this is a nice idea but somewhat idealist. It's starting to look many musicians themselves see little need for this larger picture and instead prefer to focus on their speciffic instrument and the questions it leads to for them. To me this is a great shame; I myself often turn to the Csound handbook regardless of what system I'm working in (which typically isn't csound!) and I'd like to see others enjoy such enriching sources as well. It seems that this is a losing battle because we'd be fighting against all the marketing in the instrument world at the moment which places much importance on products over principles.

So; I'm not at all in favour of structuring the whole board by brands but if it turns out that most people are then so be it. I do have to say that that I'm very much opposed to the idea of making "FM" a sub-section of a future "Yamaha" one. At one concert I recently attended the composer of a piece explained that it was written in his own FM synth which he had styled after a flight-sim because he had heard that that was the common way to controll FM.... I can completely understand why people see FM as linked to Yamaha but I utterly fail to see why that's a link anyone would like to preserve._________________Kassen

No offense to the Clavia G2 folks, but I rarely read any of it because I don't own a Nord. But it seems to me that the G2 brings quite a few folks to electro-music, and that's a good thing. I think having subtopics of different brands of synths doesn't really work (other than Clavia), since most brands already have well-established forums. Ie. Waldorf, Reaktor, etc. However, it seems that an all-brand inclusive Modular Synth forum would be quite nice. I don't own a modular system (although someday I will), but I look forward to Per's monthly column. I have been reading Big Tex's modular threads. I think most info about modulars can be of interest to any synth-head since the concepts can apply to most subtractive synths. So, I would love to see a Modular forum setup here. There are others around the net, but I feel electro-music is my homebase and my community. I'd like to see if a modular subsection would thrive here._________________Mark Mahoney
Kingsport, Tennessee
http://www.reverbnation.com/markmahoneywww.cdbaby.com/cd/markmahoneywww.cdbaby.com/cd/mmahoneympeckhttp://cdbaby.com/cd/mmahoneympeck2http://www.limitedwave.com/subterraneous/

Agreed. I was going a little overboard with all of the extra forums I was suggesting, but a general Modular Synth discussion forum would be great.

I'm sure there's tons of great info in the Clavia forums, but I don't own one either and I'm probably not going to trudge through that forum very often. Thought with the decreasing price of the G1 Nord Modular, it is definitely getting tempting.

Anyway... sorry to ruffle feathers.

I'm glad this place is here. Most of the other synth discussion forums or mailing lists I've been on are prone to flame wars and brand loyalist fanboys, etc. All I want to talk about is circuit ideas and synthesis techniques. I've definitely found a good place for that. The people here are smart and level headed.

Well, after the tremendous success that was my "let's move the G2 section" plan which beat even communism in the "idealism", "unimplementable" and "unpopular" categories I'd like to propose something new and equally unworkable.

I'd like to sugest that we only have a very vague idea what modular synthesis actually *is* as such but that practically speaking what we considder to be modular is closely linked to using signal routing in a personalised expressive manner.

Let me explain. I would say that Zappa's infamous stattic modular setup meant to emulate a brass section (I think? Wan?) should no longer be considdered a "modular" as such and is in practice more like -say- a Clavia Nord Lead in that it's modular in the underlying structure but not actively used as such, On the other hand I have no problem with calling a setup consisting of a tone generator, I good mixer and a box of guitar pedals a "modular".

Furthermore I think that the expressive use of signal routing is the important thing that the system mentioned have in common, it's the largest cause of questions, particularly where abstractions are concerned and the border between this and the use of interfaces is IMHO (but I'm not alone) *the* largest hurdle for electronic music in this decade (and probably the next as well at this rate!).

Hence I feel that if we need a section it should be this one.

Of cource such a section would be a dramatic failure.

Aside from the Clavia one and the Soundlab ones -as Mohoyoho pointed out- instrument speciffic sections don't work all that well. I imagine MAX fanatics would rather post to a specialised and established forum or list for their needs.

I still think that what actually matters is how instruments link to expression, to composition, to eachother and to the performer but once again; for reasons that are utterly beyond me nobody seems to have lots of questions there. It apears that people either let such matters be guided by a combination of trial&error and being guided by the existing and advertised posibilities of their instruments or zealously guard their thoughts and techniques. Articles on such matters are few and far inbetween, online discussion seems next to non-existant. What we need may not be a new section as much as the large cultural shift that would create it's demand._________________Kassen

I still think that what actually matters is how instruments link to expression, to composition, to eachother and to the performer but once again; for reasons that are utterly beyond me nobody seems to have lots of questions there. It apears that people either let such matters be guided by a combination of trial&error and being guided by the existing and advertised posibilities of their instruments or zealously guard their thoughts and techniques. Articles on such matters are few and far inbetween, online discussion seems next to non-existant. What we need may not be a new section as much as the large cultural shift that would create it's demand.

Actually, I do think we have briefly touched upon several of these points now and then. I am sure we will see more of this. Good points._________________A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

Blue Hell's suggestion to reorganize the forums is a good one. I once had it organized that way, with the clavia stuff down in the instruments and equipment. It seems that back in 2004 there was a bit of give and take in the Nord Modular community about using a forum instead or as an adjunct to the email list. It was suggested by someone I really respect that we should move the Clavia stuff up to the highest level. Let's see, who made that suggestion? Was it... oh yes... it was Blue Hell himself...

Anyway, if you look at the forum index page, you'll see that sub forums are only shown that are one level down. Therefore, if we moved the Clavia stuff down one level, there would only be one forum indicated for the Clavia stuff - which is about 50% of the posts on the forum. Seems like Jan's suggestion to put it at the highest level was a good idea because it brought a lot of members to the site. Without the NM crew, we would not have as good a community.

If we had a sub-forum for modular synthesizers and Clavia was in that - then it wouldn't even show up on the forum index page. That would be no good.

-==========

As for a general discussion on modular synthesis, that's what the current forum is intended to do.

Let me explain. I would say that Zappa's infamous stattic modular setup meant to emulate a brass section (I think? Wan?) should no longer be considdered a "modular" as such and is in practice more like -say- a Clavia Nord Lead in that it's modular in the underlying structure but not actively used as such, On the other hand I have no problem with calling a setup consisting of a tone generator, I good mixer and a box of guitar pedals a "modular".

Yes, afaik Zappa used his EMU modular to emulate a brass section and didn't change the patch structure, at least not for a rather long time. But this is the *use* of a modular synth as a prepatched synth. You can also *use* some prepatched stuff together in a modular way.

------ and now the forum classification scheme ----

I think this forum structure suffers from the same symptoms as any patch categorization. Someone remembers this discussion on the original NM mailing list? In short we agreed that no single classification scheme is sufficient for the retrieval of patches. There are too many contexts to classify patches on and a linear structure can only support one context. (Kofi would try to come up with the be-all-end-all structure (hey, were is Kofi?)).

The em forum is also structured on one context, i mean that each topic in electro-music.com is attached to exactly one leaf level forum category while its content is applicable to more categories. Maybe it would be nice if the poster could mark a topic relevant for a number of categories, f.i. a G2 topic could be marked relevant for the "Modular" subforum, or for the "Composition forum", if it contains content on this subjects also. Then it would also show up in that subforum(s). It would make topics more findable from different contexts.

I'm working on the list thing now. I've written and ripped it up three times already. The more I think of it, the more I like it, but the harder it is to code as the details come forth. _________________--Howard
my music and other stuff

I have therefor long advocated that the G2 section as well as the MAX (and so on) sections should be sub-sections of a larger "modular synthesis" one. In the main section the overall techniques could be discussed and ideas could be freely traded between users of various systems while system-speciffic matters could be placed in their respective sections.

i like this idea too.... it just makes good sense..to me anyway_________________ Spiral Recordings

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum

Please support our site. If you click through and buy from our affiliate partners, we earn a small commission.